Licence Appeal Tribunal File Number: 14606 MED

In the matter of an appeal from a decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles to suspend a licence under Section 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8.

Between:

Dennis Henry

Appellant

and

Registrar of Motor Vehicles

Respondent

DECISION

PANEL:

Dr. Dimitri Louvish Rupinder Hans

APPEARANCES:

For the Appellant:

Dennis Henry, Appellant

For the Respondent:

Stephen Grootenboer, Representative

HEARD: March 9, 2023

OVERVIEW

1Dennis Henry (the “appellant”) appeals the decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles (the “Registrar” or “respondent”) to suspend his Class G driver’s licence for medical reasons, specifically an alcohol use disorder, under s. 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “Act”).

2The appellant appeals the suspension and asks the Tribunal to reinstate his driver’s licence.

3Having considered all the evidence and for the reasons that follow, we set aside the decision of the Registrar.

ISSUES

4The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant suffers from a medical condition that is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.

5To resolve that issue, we will address the following questions:

i. Does the appellant suffer from a medical condition, namely an alcohol use disorder?

ii. If the appellant does suffer from alcohol use disorder, is this likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely?

RESULT

6We find the appellant does suffer from an alcohol use disorder but that it will not significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely. We set aside the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence.

ANALYSIS

The Law

7The Registrar has the authority under s.47(1)(g) of the Act to suspend or cancel a driver’s licence. One sufficient reason to suspend a driver’s licence under s.47(1)(g) of the Act is if the driver suffers from a medical condition or addiction likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive safely.

8Section 14(1)(a) of O. Reg. 340/94 enacted under the Act requires that a holder of a driver’s licence must not suffer from “any mental, emotional, nervous or physical condition or disability likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely.”

9Section 203(1) of the HTA requires medical professionals to report prescribed medical conditions to the Registrar, while s. 203(2) gives medical professionals the discretion to report medical conditions that they believe might make it dangerous for a person to drive.

10Section 14(2)(a) of O. Reg. 340/94 allows the Registrar to consider the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators Medical Standards for Drivers (“CCMTA Standards”) when determining whether the requirements of s. 14(1) are met. The CCMTA Standards are not binding on the Registrar or on this Tribunal.

11The Registrar has the burden of establishing on a balance of probabilities that one or more grounds for suspending a driver’s licence has been made out.

12Pursuant to section 50(2) of the Act, after a hearing, the Tribunal may confirm, modify or set aside the decision or order of the Registrar.

Does the appellant suffer from an alcohol use disorder?

13The evidence satisfies us that the appellant suffers from an alcohol use disorder. There is no dispute between the parties in this regard and both agree that the appellant suffers from an alcohol use disorder.

14We note that the medical evidence presented at the hearing supports the conclusion that the appellant suffers from an alcohol use disorder including the Medical Condition Report (“MCR”) dated December 16, 2022, completed by Sapanpreet Multani, nurse practitioner, at Withdrawal Management Services, Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre. The MCR states the appellant suffers from a substance use disorder, specifically alcohol, and was admitted for detox for alcohol withdrawals. The MCR notes the appellant has attended detox three times in the last 12-month period due to his alcohol use disorder.

15The appellant acknowledges that he has an alcohol use disorder and he has voluntarily attended treatment in the past to assist him with his sobriety.

16Given the evidence before us, we find on a balance of probabilities that the appellant suffers from an alcohol use disorder.

Is the appellant’s alcohol use disorder likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a vehicle safely?

17The Registrar has the burden of establishing, on a balance of probabilities, that the appellant’s alcohol use disorder is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely. We find that the Registrar has not met its burden.

18The Registrar relies on the CCMTA Standards which provide that drivers suffering from substance use disorder may be eligible for a licence if they meet the criteria for remission and/or have abstained from alcohol for twelve months. The CCMTA Standards also state that earlier re-licensing may be considered upon favourable recommendation from an addiction specialist and/or treating physician recognised by the licensing authority, and the successful completion of a drug rehabilitation program.

19The Tribunal is entitled to take the CCMTA Standards into consideration but is not bound by them.

20While the CCMTA Standards are well-reasoned and provide assistance, every case must be considered on its own facts.

21When considering the evidence, the Tribunal found persuasive the correspondence from appellant’s treating physician Dr. Heather Ambraska, dated January 20, 2023, who provides a recommendation supportive of licence reinstatement. Dr. Ambraska expresses her hope that the appellant’s licence suspension can be reviewed, as being isolated at home and unable to work is harmful for both his mental health and recovery from alcoholism. Dr. Ambraska states that last year the appellant voluntarily sought help through the outpatient detox program at the Royal Victoria Hospital. Dr. Ambraska states that the appellant has been abstinent from alcohol since December 16, 2022 and is currently compliant with naltrexone. Dr. Ambraska notes the appellant typically has mild withdrawal symptoms and has never experienced delirium tremens or seizures. Dr. Ambraska states the appellant has previously completed rehabilitation for his alcohol use disorder, has a long-standing addictions counsellor through the Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA), and was involved in peer counselling. He is also about to start therapy with the Ontario Structured Psychotherapy program through Waypoint. Dr. Ambraska further states that the appellant has good insight into his alcohol use disorder and very much wants help. He is noted as compliant with treatment.

22Correspondence from the CMHA, dated January 30, 2023, was provided confirming the appellant’s involvement with the Addiction Program and that he has been attending individual counselling sessions since May 21, 2021. The appellant’s addictions counsellor states that he appears to be motivated in his recovery and actively participates in sessions.

23The appellant testified that he attends weekly meetings with his addiction’s counsellor at CMHA. He also attends weekly peer counseling at CMHA. He states that he has the insight to seek the help he requires immediately which he has done in the past. He does not try to manage on his own and instead reaches out for assistance from his community and medical supports.

24The appellant relied upon a Substance Use Assessment, dated January 6, 2023, completed by his treating physician Dr. Serena Deketela, who states that the appellant has completed a supervised treatment program as a result of his alcohol use disorder and attended detox on December 16, 2022. Dr. Deketela notes the appellant and his wife state that he has never driven a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

25The appellant testified that he has been vigilant about not operating a vehicle while drinking, either for personal use or business use. Many years ago, he purchased a home breathalyzer machine to ensure he does not drink while intoxicated above the legal limit. He testified that he checks his blood alcohol content prior to driving. He testified that if he is in a relapse, he does not attend work or operate any heavy machinery. His employer is aware of his alcohol use disorder and is supportive of him and understands that if he has relapsed, he will not be attending work.

26A supporting letter from the appellant’s employer, Chamberlain Timber Mart, dated February 24, 2023 states that the appellant has been an employee since August 4, 2020, and they are aware of his medical condition. They state there have been no issues or concerns with the appellant’s work performance or abilities due to his medical condition and his duties include operating heavy equipment such as forklifts. In addition, with respect to relapses, they note the appellant does not commute to work or attend work until he is stable.

27The appellant testified that he is aware of his triggers for relapse, which include boredom, elevated stress, isolation, and lack of routine, and he immediately and proactively attends treatment to manage his condition. He states that he has never been ordered to attend treatment but attends voluntarily to assist himself. He testified that he manages his condition with anti-craving medication which has been effective, and he says the depression and anxiety medications are assisting.

28The appellant testified that he has never had any drinking and driving issues and has not been charged with any related Criminal Code of Canada offences. The appellant’s driving records show no alcohol related infractions.

29The appellant testified that his family doctor, who has assisted in managing his alcohol condition for years, has not felt it necessary that his driver’s licence be suspended.

30The appellant testified that he needs his vehicle to drive to work, to attend his treatment appointments, and to attend to his day to day tasks. He works at a lumber yard and his main role is operating a forklift in the yard. Getting anywhere without his driver’s licence has been difficult. The appellant testified that he is fine to drive and he says there is little evidence to prove he has a condition that would prevent him from driving in a safe manner.

31It would appear the appellant meets the criteria under the CCMTA Standards as his treating physician supports reinstatement of his licence, he is in remission and continues to attend addictions treatment. We find that the appellant is committed to remaining abstinent and continues to actively participate in his own rehabilitation. He has not used alcohol since December 16, 2022, regularly attends individual counselling and group/peer counseling, and regularly attends and seeks assistance from his treating physicians. He has a support system in place which includes his treating doctors, addiction counsellor, spouse and employer.

32In our view, the Registrar’s proposed six-month time frame is arbitrary in the circumstances of this case, particularly given that the appellant’s driving record discloses no alcohol-related infractions.

33Given the above, we find the Registrar has not established that the appellant’s alcohol use disorder is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely.

ORDER

34For the reasons set out above, pursuant to section 50(2) of the Act, we find the appellant does suffer from an alcohol use disorder but that it will not significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely. We set aside the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence.